José Manuel Barroso
© European Community, 2005 |
|
 José Manuel BARROSO
President of the European Commission
Building an open Europe in times of change
European Ideas Network
Lisbon, 22 September 2005
Ladies and gentlemen,
Let me start by saying what a pleasure it is to be among so many old friends again. The European Ideas Network has carved out a distinctive role for itself in a very short time and proven its value as a promoter of new thinking. So this is a good opportunity for me to outline my thoughts on the challenges we face in Europe today.
Some of you may have heard the wise old saying: ‘It is important to your friends that you are unreservedly frank with them, and important to friendship that you are not’. Well, with your indulgence, I intend to break with that advice this evening by being as frank as possible about the road ahead.
Europe needs to reform. The drivers for reform are well known; internally, we have 20 million unemployed and that is unacceptable from a social point of view. Externally, we see the extraordinary dynamism of the emerging economies. Equally, the double ‘no’ to the European Constitution and failure to agree on new financial perspectives have shaken people’s faith in the European project. The rising tide of euroscepticism, even in traditionally supportive Member States, means that a growing number of our citizens now see the European Union as part of the problem, not part of the solution.
Despite these problems, I remain a realistic optimist. Europe has already achieved so much, and still has work to do. Sixty or seventy years ago, battles were being fought across the continent which killed millions of Europeans. Thirty-five years ago, dictatorships were still ruling many European countries, including my own. And it wasn’t until 15 years ago that countries in Central and Eastern Europe recovered their freedom. This year marks the tenth anniversary of the massacres at Srebrenica. So Europe’s marathon run towards peace, democracy, stability and prosperity continues. It is vital that we do not throw away its continuing potential to deliver what no single Member State could hope to achieve alone.
Today’s challenge is globalization. Change, technological and societal, takes place at a breathtaking speed. The question is whether to resist this change, or rather to manage it. In order to be able to protect and promote freedom, security and prosperity, to deliver on the expectations of our citizens, we need to reap not forego the benefits of globalization. We must engage and shape it in accordance with our values and principles. That means Europe must open up. It must open up internally, in relations between Member States and between its institutions and its citizens. It must open up even more to the world, during this period of rapid change. And finally it must be open to renewal of its economic structures; to make sure it is fit to face up to the 21st century with confidence.
What it must not do is close in on itself, and prefer sterile, black and white debates about economic union versus political union, or market Europe versus social Europe. This is a false dichotomy.
The fact is, it is simply wrong to think that a single market can be sustained without social cohesion, a political vision and the solidarity that flows from the feeling of belonging to a common project. It is just as wrong to think that you can have a political union without the glue of economic integration. Let’s not forget that it was Schuman himself, in his famous declaration of 9 May 1950, who spoke of: ‘the setting up of common foundations for economic development as a first step in the federation of Europe’. Political integration and economic integration go hand in hand. They cannot be separated, because if they are, both will fail.
One of the decisions that the Commission took just this week perfectly illustrates the point. It relates to one of the biggest concerns of our citizens – terrorism. We proposed a draft directive on retention of telecommunications and internet data for the purposes of law enforcement. It is an example of coordinating the market with political objectives, of reconciling effective law enforcement with a dynamic economy. It is a demonstration that Europe’s centre of gravity cannot be the extremes of either anti-market monotheism or of anti-state monotheism. Europe’s centre of gravity is where the political and the economic project meet and reinforce each other.
It was in this spirit that my Commissioners and I had an European Ideas Fair of our own on Tuesday. Discussions focused on the future of Europe, the related issue of how to renew Europe’s economic and social models, our political priorities for the months ahead, and the crucial need for an agreement on the next financial perspectives.
Turning first to Europe’s future, I’ll begin by repeating that the European Constitution will not enter into force for the time being. I regret this. There were proposals in it which would have made the EU more effective and accountable. But the absence of a new Treaty must not become an excuse for paralysis. With political will, determination and commitment, we can do a lot even under the existing treaties. Have we used the existing treaties to their full potential? We must use what we have as best we can, to act for the benefit of all our citizens: to stimulate growth for more and better jobs, boost education, research and innovation, fight terrorism, remove barriers between Member States that make citizens’ lives unnecessary difficult, and artificially constrain our European ambitions.
In order to be able to move on and put Europe back to work, we must build a new consensus around renewed policies for a new period in European integration. My Commission is set and ready to take the initiative. We will of course not work from an ivory tower. This Commission’s orientation is one of “leadership by partnership”. Part of this is what we call “plan D”, the plan for debate, dialogue and democracy. We will go into the Member States and engage in an ever more intense discussion with civil society, about their concerns and their expectations. We will establish ‘European Round Tables’ bringing together citizens to take part in cross-border, face-to-face meetings each year. This will help build up confidence, trust and common ground, which in turn will unlock a greater willingness to find consensus on institutional matters.
The area in most urgent need of action is the renewal of Europe’s different economic and social structures while respecting the principles and values that shape our European way of pursuing competitiveness ad social justice; a fact recognised by the broad welcome for the current Presidency’s proposal to hold an informal meeting of the Heads of State and Government for the end of October.
Why this urgency? I’ve just come back from China and India and what I saw was a vivid demonstration of the sheer speed and scale of the changes going on in the world.
Let me give a few concrete examples. China is increasing its energy production capacity at the rate of a new power station every two weeks. In 1999, its foreign trade was equivalent to that of the Netherlands, one small Member State. In 2002 it overtook the UK. Now China ranks third in the world in terms of its volume of foreign merchandise trade, after the EU and the US.
If China’s new dynamism is driven by manufacturing, then India’s comes from services. I read recently that there are 2 million new GSM subscribers there every month. India is tapping into a European, indeed, global demand for efficient services. They increasingly process the world’s tax returns, analyse the world’s medical tests, respond to the world’s telephone inquiries and design its software.
Of course, these extraordinary changes provoke strong reactions. But we must remember that globalisation is driven by a very human desire – the desire of billions of people to create a better life for themselves and their families. Who could criticise that? From mobile telephones to low cost air carriers, from fusion food to world music, our own, European citizens have grown accustomed to the benefits of a world where peoples, states and economies don’t stand back to back, but engage with each other.
So let us hold onto this fact. That the drivers of globalisation are human beings, and the winners from globalisation are human beings. Globalisation is being led by all of us, by the choices we make. It is driven by imagination and creativity of millions of people, through technological and scientific progress.
Furthermore, globalisation can and should benefit Europe. Europe is the biggest trading bloc in the world, and we have the most to lose if protectionism rises. We should be confident of our place in the world, and the contribution we can make to it. It is happening with Europe or without, and I am determined that Europe will shape it rather than simply suffer it.
If some people continue to fear globalization, I suspect it is because they think that prosperity is static. That they will need to give up a part of their slice of the cake if others claim some cake, too. But we know from history that prosperity is dynamic. Globalization is a chance to increase the size of the whole cake, so that everybody can get a slice.
After all, the emergence of the USA since 1776 did not diminish Europe’s prosperity – on the contrary, it fuelled unrivalled prosperity on both sides of the Atlantic. There is no reason why China, India or Latin America cannot reap similar rewards from what is going on today. It is our duty as political leaders to give people confidence that the future holds more opportunities than risks - if only we have the courage to seize those opportunities.
However, globalisation does make it harder for us to bury our heads in the sand over our own structural problems.
That is why failing to deliver our Lisbon Strategy objectives would be so unwise. We must remain at the forefront through innovation and investment in the knowledge economy. We must reform state aid policy, to ensure money is spent on improving competitiveness rather than delaying necessary structural changes which are going to happen anyway. And we must support efforts to deal with the social consequences of economic restructuring, being careful to maintain our flexibility by ensuring that adequate safety nets are targeted at the individual rather than the job.
We could also make things easier for ourselves by playing to our strengths – like the service sector, for example, Europe’s biggest untapped source of growth. It is difficult to argue in favour of sustaining 25 mini-markets in the face of growing competition in the rest of the world. What we should have is a strong single market in services, as foreseen from the beginning by the Treaty of Rome. I very much hope that the European Parliament will come with proposals on the Services Directive, and that the Commission can work in partnership with the Parliament to ensure a balanced approach, taking account of its social impact.
Such a balanced Directive on services would be a good example of European legislation adding real value. We must not allow thoughtful, solid European construction to fall victim to the caricature of the Commission as a bureaucratic monster strangling the continent with excessive and unnecessary laws. We must show that this is a false image.
That is why it is also important to show that the Commission is the champion of Better Regulation. To show that this is a lasting change in the way we do business and one of the most important European-level contributions to the Lisbon Strategy.
This is not an excuse to do less. The measure of success is not the quantity of legislation produced, but its quality. The Commission must remain the motor of Europe. The evidence shows that it is.
First of all, on a purely practical level, we are well ahead on the delivery of our work programme compared to the same point in previous years. We have been particularly active in the fields of justice and security, and the environment, for example.
But on the more tactical level as well, it seems to me that Europe will only continue to move forward if we concentrate on things that can better be dealt with at the EU level. If something could be done at another level, then those favouring other solutions may resent an EU-imposed solution. They will feel overruled rather than convinced, and could come to define themselves in opposition to, rather than as a part of, the integration project. That means we must get serious about subsidiarity.
So Better Regulation is about making Europe more effective and stronger, but what does it mean in practice?
There are three elements to our work here. The first part was the mainstreaming of impact assessments, and the Commission will continue to improve their quality and coverage. The second part, which is drawing to a close now, is the screening of pending proposals to check their compatibility with the Lisbon Strategy and Better Regulation principles.
The third part of our Better Regulation programme will be a root and branch review of all Community legislation leading to a major simplification package. This will include rolling back legislation which is no longer necessary. Our goal should be precisely targeted legislation that works.
The last of our immediate challenges is to encourage a rapid agreement on the financial perspectives, to avoid paralysis in the Union beyond 2006. It is crucial that the British Presidency devotes to this all energy and commitment. Any delay risks having a very negative effect on our policies and on our Member States – particularly the new ones. The time has come for the Commission to go on the offensive, and we will put forward some ideas at the most appropriate moment to try to help the Presidency of the Council unblock the negotiations.
Ladies and gentlemen,
Much of what I have outlined this evening is about change: changes in the way we think about integration, and changes caused by globalisation.
You cannot resist change, nor should you try. You should manage change, in order to ensure the survival, even the reinforcement, of your core values and principles.
That is why I remain deeply committed to Europe.
It simply doesn’t make sense to have a purely national response to, say, avian flu or climate change. It doesn’t make sense to hide behind borders and hope that globalisation will go away. Only through Europe can we even hope to be able to manage the enormous changes going on around us.
I don’t dismiss the fear of change; it can run very deep. I don’t dismiss the sometimes difficult consequences of change; they are real and need to be managed. What I do dismiss is the idea that the European Union, the project inspired by some great statesmen as Schuman, Adenauer or De Gasperi is irrelevant to change. The European Community was created both because of change and because of the desire to manage that change. That mission is as valid today as it was 50, 60 years ago.
Ironically, these are dangerous times for Europe, at the very moment it is most needed. Waves of populism are sweeping across the continent: anti-market populism and anti-Europe populism.
But we must weather these storms and stick to our course, by showing real leadership and deep political commitment. Only through Europe can we be the authors of our fate, and not the victims of it.
Let’s put Europe back to work.
Thank you.
European Union
europa.eu.int
© European Community, 2005 |
|
|
|
